Venture Capital Funds Remain Hungry for Fintechs

Fintech investment isn’t drying up, so much as resetting from rabid to rational. That’s the assessment of several bank-backed fintech investment funds, where interest in striking deals remains high.

“Given the reset in valuations, more disciplined cash burn in the companies we are looking at and record deal flow, it’s a great environment for us and I expect us to step up our pace of investments in 2023,” says Adam Aspes, general partner at JAM Special Opportunity Ventures.

Over the past two years, its JAM FINTOP joint venture has raised about $312 million from a network of more than 90 bank investors to put into promising fintech and blockchain technology. It has two funds with a five-year investment period, “so we are still in the very early days of deploying capital,” Aspes says.

Regulators have signaled that they’ll be scrutinizing bank-fintech partnerships more closely and reviewing how well compliance issues are addressed. That might have unsettled some venture capitalists, especially those from outside the industry who are sometimes referred to as fintech “tourists.” But Aspes is unphased.

“We have always had a thesis [that] there would be greater emphasis on fintechs being compliant with a bank’s regulated rails,” he says. “So, I don’t think our investment thesis has changed, but I think the market is definitely moving in our direction,” especially in the areas of blockchain technology and banking as a service, or BaaS.

Activity at the venture capital divisions of the largest U.S. banks has not cooled off significantly either, says Grant Easterbrook, a fintech consultant.

“While the total dollars involved may be down relative to 2021 — as firms retrench in a down market and valuations fall — I am not seeing any signs of a major pullback from fintech,” Easterbook says. “Banks know that technology continues to be both a weakness and an opportunity, and they are looking for deals.”

Carey Ransom, managing director of the BankTech Ventures fund, is on the hunt for “real solutions to real problems,” and thinks the fintech shakeout will benefit investors like him. His goal is to find fintechs that can be of value to the more than 100 community banks in his fund by advancing their digital transformation efforts in some way. So the fund isn’t just injecting capital, but helping the fintechs grow.

“We have increasing relevance in a market shift like this,” Ransom says. “We have a very clear value proposition.”

In his view, the market had gotten out of whack with all the free-flowing money over the last year. Now the focus is on more sensible valuation metrics. “Some of it is just returning back to the right valuations and fundamentals,” he says.

David Francione, managing director and head of fintech at Capstone Partners in Boston, has a similar take, pointing out that 2021 skewed perceptions in more ways than one. With the pent-up demand following the Covid-19 pandemic, “2021 was a record year by anybody’s imagination for any metric.”

He notes that investment in fintechs for this year is up compared to the years prior to 2021, so he thinks the dramatic drop-off needs to be put into perspective. “If you strip out 2021, and you look at the prior three or so years before that, this year is still a record year, relatively speaking,” Francione says.

Still, he would not be surprised if there is a lull in activity, given factors like the geopolitical environment and the threat of a recession.

“I think this year is sort of a transition year. Things are probably taking a little bit longer to finance. At least that’s what we’re seeing in some of the transactions that we’re in,” says Francione, whose firm was recently acquired by the $179 billion Huntington Bancshares in Columbus, Ohio. “I would call it more of a pause than anything.”

Like Ransom, Francione thinks the pause could benefit banks that want to partner with fintechs. Francione’s advice to fintechs is to reflect on what they can do to solve a problem that banks — or more importantly, the bank’s customers — have.

“A lot of these fintechs that we’re talking to, they think, ‘Oh, this bank could be interesting.’ But sometimes they don’t really understand why and what they can really do for them. So they really have to peel back the onion and figure out: Who are their customers? Is it a similar target market? What are some of their needs? Does our technology solution address those needs? Can they integrate easily? What is the real value that they’re going to bring to this potential bank partnership, whether the partnership is in the form of an investment or is strictly a partnership to resell some of its products?”

Ransom says he has been in meetings where fintech executives come in saying they are out to disrupt banks. Then they find out that Ransom works with banks and because they need to raise money, “mid-conversation they shift their tone to, ‘Maybe I can help banks,’” he says.

His top recommendation to fintech executives that want to work with BankTech Ventures is to understand the value their technology can provide to community banks. “If we have to explain it, they’ll lack credibility,” Ransom says.

The fintech founders who tend to be a fit for his fund — which is backed by banks ranging in size from $200 million to $20 billion in assets — are less flashy and more pragmatic. The ideal founders also have taken care to capitalize the fintech properly.

“Don’t raise $100 million for a business that’ll sell for $200 million,” Ransom says. “That’s a change we have seen — which I see as healthy.”

Those that take on too much money create a situation where the risk is no longer worth the potential return for investors. But the total amount raised is not the only concern; the types of investments can also be an issue.

He believes some fintechs take on too much “preference capital,” the outside money that gets priority for returns over common shares, which the founding executives tend to own. If the executives think they are unlikely to get paid, it misaligns incentives and creates a risk that they could decide to leave the fintech, Ransom says.

If some fintechs are in a sudden scramble to cut expenses, slow the cash burn and move from growth to profitability faster, fintech analyst Alex Johnson suggests that it is to be expected after the heady cash free-for-all that prevailed last year.

“Between 2019 and 2021, money was just too readily available. A lot of tourists — founders looking to get rich quickly and generalist VC firms sitting on massive piles of cash — wandered into fintech and screwed stuff up,” Johnson writes in a recent edition of his Fintech Takes newsletter.

A growth-over-everything mindset prevailed and a lot of bad behavior got overlooked. “One example: the alarming amount of first-party fraud that has been tolerated by neobanks in recent years,” he writes. “And now we are all suffering through the hangover.”

What Venture Capitalists Predict in the World of Fintech


summitt.png

Fintech is no longer the enemy of banking. While much of the talk among fintech companies just a year or two ago was that they wanted to disrupt the dinosaurs of banking, now the tone has changed, said several speakers at the FinXTech Annual Summit Wednesday in New York City.

“I’ve seen a slight change in the business model, where it’s now about —How can we partner with the banks?’’’ said Jim Hale, the founding partner of FTV Capital, a venture capital firm. “The tone has changed.”

The event gathered more than 200 entrepreneurs and bankers together to discuss partnerships, financial technology and trends. Hale was one of several venture capitalists at the conference giving his perspective on future trends in financial technology and the challenges of partnering with banks.

In fact, many of the biggest banks, some of them in attendance, such as Wells Fargo & Co. and Citigroup, have started venture capital arms to invest in fintech startups, so they can learn and influence the direction of future technology.

The most active banks investing in fintech startups are Banco Santander, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Mizuho Financial Group and JPMorgan Chase & Co., according to a new report from CBInsights, which tracks financial technology investments globally.

The report said global venture capital funding and deal activity fell slightly in the first quarter compared to a year ago, but rose compared to the fourth quarter of 2016, a trend that venture capitalist Ryan Gilbert, a partner at Propel Venture Partners, said was likely the result of uncertainty brought on by Brexit and the U.S. presidential election.

There were 226 venture-backed investments in financial technology companies globally in the first quarter of 2017, receiving $2.7 billion in funding, compared to 256 investments and $4.9 billion in the first quarter of 2016, according to CBInsights. In the U.S., there were 90 deals financed in the first quarter with $1.1 billion in cash, compared to 137 in the first quarter of last year at $1.8 billion.

Hale estimated that 90 percent of fintech companies focus directly on consumers, but he is more interested in funding solutions that solve the back-office problems and infrastructure needs of banks. He is also interested in solutions that manage data quicker, faster and cheaper than current solutions do.

Gregg Schoenberg, the founder of Westcott Capital, said he sees opportunity to make asset management more efficient, since the cost structure in these organizations is high. Banks also have a tremendous amount of data on their customers and could use that more effectively. Few other industries are required by law to collect as much data on their customers as banks are, which have to meet know-your-customer and anti-money laundering mandates, he said.

For examples of how technology can create more efficient processes, banks might look to successful companies such as Domino’s Pizza, which has a high stock price not based on the quality of its pizza, but by its distribution system, Schoenberg said. The company has a robotics division and 17 different ways to order a pizza, he added.

Gilbert is looking to invest in emerging technologies such as voice recognition and artificial intelligence, enabling capabilities like having conversations anytime with your “banker” in the form of a chat bot, for example.

“That’s really rethink and rebuild,” he said. Gilbert is often more excited about innovation happening outside the U.S., such as Singapore, a country with a lot of wealth and a stable, central regulator, and where banks are using chat bots and voice recognition software.

In the U.S., there are more hurdles, and multiple regulatory bodies for the banking industry, including federal and state agencies. Just yesterday, the Conference of State Bank Supervisors sued the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency over the latter’s proposal to regulate fintech firms.

Still, Gilbert is not pessimistic. “Now is not the time to give up,’’ he said in an interview yesterday. “We have 5,800 banks and there are a lot of opportunities to turn these institutions into great things. Technology is developing at such a rapid pace. The best is yet to come.”

M&A in Fintech: A Sideshow Worth Watching


startup-10-14-15.pngIt’s no secret that what has been happening in the fintech space is attracting more attention from the world of banking. It’s hard to ignore the fact that venture capital invested $10 billion in fintech startups in 2014, compared to just $3 billion in 2013, according to an Accenture analysis of CB Insights data.

But watching M&A in the fintech space shows that these startups are much more likely to pair with others or get acquired by incumbents than they are to go public with an initial public offering, as noted by bank analyst Tai DiMaio in a KBW podcast recently.

“Together, through partnerships, acquisitions or direct investments, you can really have a situation where both parties benefit [the fintech company and the established player],’’ he says.

That may lend credence to my initial suspicions that there are more opportunities in fintech for banks than threats to established players and that these startups really need to pair up to be successful.

Take BlackRock’s announcement in August that it will acquire FutureAdvisor, a leading digital wealth management platform with technology-enabled investment advice capabilities (a so-called “robo advisor.”) With some $4.7 trillion in assets under management, BlackRock offers investment management, risk management and advisory services to institutional and retail clients worldwide—so this deal certainly caught my attention.

According to FT Partners, the investment bank that served as exclusive advisor to BlackRock, the combination of FutureAdvisor’s tech-enabled advice capabilities with Blackrock’s investment and risk management solutions “empowers partners to meet the growing demand among consumers to engage with technology to gain insights on their investment portfolios.” This should be seen as a competitive move to traditional institutions, as demand for such information “is particularly strong among the mass-affluent, who account for ~30 percent of investable assets in the U.S.”

Likewise, I am constantly impressed with Capital One Financial Corp., an institution that has very publicly shared its goal of being more of a technology company than a bank. To leapfrog the competition, Capital One is quite upfront in their desire to to deliver new tech-based features faster then any other bank. As our industry changes, the chief financial officer, Rob Alexander, opines that the winners will be the ones that become technology-focused businesses—and not remain old school banking companies. This attitude explains why Capital One was the top performing bank in Bank Director’s Bank Performance Scorecard this year.

Case-in-point, Capital One acquired money management app Level Money earlier this year to help consumers keep track of their spendable cash and savings. Prior to that, it acquired San Francisco-based design firm Adaptive Path “to further improve its user experience with digital.” Over the past three years, the company has also added e-commerce platform AmeriCommerce, digital marketing agency PushPoint, spending tracker Bundle and mobile startup BankOns. Heck, just last summer, one of Google’s “Wildest Designers” left the tech giant to join the bank.

When they aren’t being bought by banks, some tech companies are combining forces instead. Envestnet, a Chicago-based provider of online investment tools, acquired a provider of personal finance tools to banks, Yodlee, in a cash-and-stock transaction that valued Yodlee at about $590 million. By combining wealth management products with personal financial management tools, you see how non-banks are taking steps to stay competitive and gain scale.

Against this backdrop, Prosper Marketplace’s tie up with BillGuard really struck me as compelling. As a leading online marketplace for consumer credit that connects borrowers with investors, Prosper’s acquisition of BillGuard marked the first time an alternative lender is merging with a personal financial management service provider. While the combination of strong lending and financial management services by a non-bank institution is rare, I suspect we will see more deals like this one struck between non-traditional financial players.

There is a pattern I’m seeing when it comes to M&A in the financial space. Banks may get bought for potential earnings and cost savings, in addition to their contributions to the scale of a business. Fintech companies also are bought for scale, but they are mostly bringing in new and innovative ways to meet customers’ needs, as well as top-notch technology platforms. They often offer a more simple and intuitive approach to customer problems. And that is why it’s important to keep an eye on M&A in the fintech space. There may be more opportunity there than threat.